https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376466 A trader challenged Ext. P1 orders on the ground that they were made beyond the time allowed under Section 19 of the Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016, and also questioned the validity of clauses (d) and (e) of Section 174 of the Kerala GST Act. The petition further contended that the erstwhile Entry 54 and the Kerala Value Added Tax Act could not be enforced after 15.9.2017, and that Section 174 could not operate inconsistently with Article 246A and Section 19 of the Amendment Act. The writ petition was dismissed in light of the decision in M/s. Sheen Golden Jewels (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. State Tax Officer. en-us Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Mar 2025 17:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376466 A trader challenged Ext. P1 orders on the ground that they were made beyond the time allowed under Section 19 of the Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016, and also questioned the validity of clauses (d) and (e) of Section 174 of the Kerala GST Act. The petition further contended that the erstwhile Entry 54 and the Kerala Value Added Tax Act could not be enforced after 15.9.2017, and that Section 174 could not operate inconsistently with Article 246A and Section 19 of the Amendment Act. The writ petition was dismissed in light of the decision in M/s. Sheen Golden Jewels (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. State Tax Officer. Case-Laws GST Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376466